About your Search

20130115
20130123
STATION
CSPAN2 80
LANGUAGE
English 80
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 80
governance project, which challenges philadelphia sovereignty. and then we'll move to action and look at the actual activities. fourth, will examine the significance of this conflict between constitutional government and global governance. sovereignty is defending the scholars scholars than most people as westphalian, embodied in the nation state is going the treaty of 1648 and that's true to an extent. when i was working on the book and thinking of coming up with concepts, i relist americans don't think of themselves as westphalian sovereignty. we the people of the united states of america. opening words of the constitution, written in philadelphia, hence philadelphia sovereignty. but what is philadelphia sovereignty, the people are sovereign, the three constitution and the core of the twin pillars of our liberty and consent. so we do have majority rule, but majority rule is limited reconstitution and the whole system of separation of powers, federalism and limited government. a lot of times people get hung up in the republic or democracy. wary compound machine, a regime that is both
the government might further tax a high tax payers in wales? >> government is considering their recommendation of the report and we would be reported by those very shortly. that will be the appropriate time. >> we all know that millionaires spend -- [inaudible] can he tell us dummy millionaires are in wales? >> he knows as well as i do the road, few millionaires in wales. but what i can tell him is that in every year this parliament they will be paying more tax than they did in each year of the last labour government. >> thank you, mr. speaker. but isn't the real danger that with a government changes in tax and benefits in wales, you will see in particular in the community with the vast majority of people work of those people will have less money in their pockets? they will have less money to spend in local shops? there will be more shops closing. there will be fewer people in jobs and it will be a double whammy for the welsh economy? >> if he wants to be taken seriously with having a mess about deficit reduction, he knows you cannot begin to to deficit reduction until you take a serious appro
assume that the national government must at all costs remain support of the four slave states within the union. those in light blue. so called loyal border states, delaware, missouri, maryland and especially kentucky top do that, he believed, the republicans must not an antagonize those states politically powerful slave holders. antagonize them by interfering with slavery in the succeeding states at least not interfering with them anymore than necessary. lincoln was sure that if he did otherwise the slave holders would pick up and leave as well. second lincoln assumes that only a small minority in the succeeding states really support succession. he and other republicans believe that the great majority of white southerners in the confederacy. slave holders and nonslave holders alike. loyal abiding citizens who had been tricked in to suck us is suggestion by a minority of extremists. leaving slavery alone would hopefully, win them back in to the union. that is the expectations. but after a full year of war, and despite lincoln's efforts to spare their property and feelings, precious fe
nation's history, it was the states rather than federal government that controlled access to religious worship, the rights of religious organizations and so on. and in the early decades of the 20th century, that began to shift as the supreme court applied the national constitutional establishment and free exercise clauses of the first amendment against the states sort of centralizing debates about religion. >> host: but if the states had the control, we had it written into our constitution, freedom of religion. >> guest: we did, indeed. but the first amendment begins "congress shall enact no law." so it was addressed only to the national government. >> host: were there restrictions by different states on religion? >> guest: oh, yes, there were. several states had religious establishments. most states limited the amount of property a religious organization could own. some taxed religious property. others banned given groups' practices. i'm thinking, for example, eventually various states in the southwest banning polygamy, for example. >> host: so when it came to massachusetts, talk abou
is to increase the size of government. but nevertheless, they were second strings, if you will. hayek, contemporary of chambers and russell kirk as well, we were represented the other two strands of it. but until the '70s probably, communism was the dominant thing. something i have wondered about was when ronald reagan was elected, whether as you look at the history of the conservative movement, anti-communism became much less of a deal. and i wonder if with ronald reagan the people who were anti-communist don't deny this anti-communist in charge who was the commander in chief and they felt comfortable enough leading anti-communism so they did need to put the same amount of emphasis into it that they had and focused on other things. anyway, so let's turn for a few minutes to where the movement is today after at the communism. and, of course, we've had what, 20, 25 years since communism to figure out where the conservative movement goes. but there are certainly, i think some things that are different but a great many things are the same to basically the tenets of conservatism are the s
. it'll continue for about 90 minutes. there'll be a panel on improving government performance. we'll have it live for you here on c-span2. yesterday and today johns hopkins university in baltimore has been hosting a summit on reducing gun violence. speakers have included new york city mayor michael bloomberg and maryland governor martin o'malley. this afternoon at 4 eastern they will hold a news conference to release their recommendations for stemming gun violence. we'll have live coverage here on c-span2. again, that will be at 4 p.m. eastern. >>> and right around this time to have year every year governors address their state legislatures on the state of their states. laying out the priorities for the new year. tonight at 7:30 we'll take you live to the kansas statehouse for an address by the state's governor, sam brownback. that'll get underway at 7:30 eastern. >> he had been talking about this dream that he had had. he had talked about it for years, you know? the american dream. and that had become his dream. and he had been in detroit just a few months before, and he had talk
in the 1940's. >> short. a chicken farmer. also a wheat farmer. and roscoe sued the federal government when they told him that he could not raise the adequate amount of we that he wanted to because the government had decided there were going to control replanting. what he said was a okay, but i can raise we for my chickens. he took it all the way to the supreme court and lost that battle. >> what you recount the story? >> because it is a great example on the enumerated powers and what -- what we find ourselves in the place we are in now? how do we get here? what do we do about it? what other ramifications. the greatest way for the government to make something expensive is whether government to make it affordable. and all you have to do is look at the programs. the average of a shared cost of health care before we created medicare and medicaid? iran the same as every other aspect of our inflation. in other words, there was no differential between health care costs. now that we have a government program what has happened is health care costs are too, sometimes three times the rate of the aver
minister tell the house what the government is doing to keep pensioners warm in this cold weather, and will he join me in congratulating the suffolk foundation for the success, for the great success of their surviving -- [inaudible] >> what this government has done is, first of all,tive the biggest -- give the biggest increase in the state pension of five pounds, 30 last year. we've kept the cold weather payments at the high level, and we're replacing the warm front scheme, and while that helps something like 80,000 houses a year, the eco could help up to 230,000 houses a year. that is what we're doing, and it's a record we should be proud of. >> thank you, mr. speaker. the prime minister should know that the ons have recently released figures that show there were 24,000 extra cold weather deaths over the winter of 2010-2012. the majority of those who perished were over the age of 75. so, mr. speaker, can i ask the prime minister if he thinks his government should do more to help the elderly and the vulnerable and less to help millionaires with tax cuts? >> as i just said, we are
many deaths and fueled much profit, how they make their way into the u.s. and what the u.s. government's role has been in insuring they come into this country and this evening we are pleased to be joined by two drug policy experts as well. san ho tree and, though -- ca e carletta anhgo. i want to hand it over to the panel. [applause] >> thank you so much for coming out here. i just came in from new york. great to be here. i am going to start by talking about my book and then go into -- which focuses on coca and coca policy and how that is relevant especially this week with what is going on at the un and the history of the tree that prohibits coca around world. my book started as a children's book. it started as a follow-up to a children's book about marijuana in 2004-2005. it wasn't a book about teaching kids how to smoke weed. it was uneducated -- it occasional book about how to talk to your kids about the cult subject that they might run into. that is why the format is like an illustrated picture book for kids that as i got deeper into the subject and started looking into coca which
ought to cancel this because it's never going to work. here's how an efficient government is. this last week we spend another hundred million dollars before they canceled it. they paid a settlement fee of $8 million. but two things didn't happen. the person responsible didn't get fired and wasn't held accountable in the company that didn't provide the service didn't get sued to get our money back, taxpayers of the country. nobody runs their household that way. the state government don't operate that way, but we are totally incompetent when it comes to spending america's taxpayer money. why would we continue to a $32 billion a year on i.t. programs that don't work for the federal government. but 60% of what they take out of the pentagon and that's governmentwide. why would we do that? were going to have a special senate committee to look at this, oversight, look at bad actors in government and demand the people get fired in the company is not performing pay the money back. none of that happens. so you can defraud the federal government. you can do it with impunity and that's because memb
their individual wealth and privileges to cooperate fully with the confederate government struggling to protect the interests of slave owners as a whole. and those are aspects of the book that i'm discussing with you today. but this evening i'd like to talk to you about the most important fissure that ran through the house of dixie, slavery, and the three ways slavery figured in the origin and the progress of the o civil war. first of all, the war's central cause. secondly, as a crucial source of military power deployed during that war. and, third, slavery's erosion during the war and its destruction both of those things as an eventual union goal. the destruction of slavery as an eventual conscious, deliberate union goal. so let's start with cause. as you may know, in a recent national survey half of all those people, half of all those americans when were polled deny that slavery was the main cause of the u.s. civil war. and that view is apparently gaining ground, not losing ground. because among younger people polled, those below 30 years of age, fully three out of five denied slavery's centra
under the flag today. so the question is whether the institutions in the way that the government has dominated and if you will corrupted the independence of the institutions will last even if we went to the election if they declare that he dies tomorrow which there is a rumor that they would do that actually going around now, that if he would be declared dead and they called an election within 30 days and the opposition won, meaning the sympathy vote for the candidate which is difficult after what we saw on december 16th and dhaka election we just talked about, chavez has 20 of 23 governors. 11 of the governors that were run by the chavez party are former military officials, including four ministers of defense, who are now governors of their respective states. several of them are all along the office of the control campaign list because of their work with the farc so we have a situation where people are in control of things, so that even if henry embrey de four e elected president in this election it's the opposite -- he's the head of the opposition who ran against chavez and got a 4
industry and manufacturing. the second on deficit reform, and the third on improving government performance. the participants here today include brookings scholars, outside experts, and private sector representatives and leaders. our discussions will reflect a lot of the research that goes on here at brookings, and you will be able to find a number of examples of that research outside the auditorium where you came in. my recommended particular, the work of our metropolitan program on ideas on how to revitalize manufacturing, and also the work of art government studies program on how to make innovation-based economy. the growth through innovation project is an example of what we're doing increasingly here at brookings, and that is undertaking both research and public events and outreach that draw from multiple programs of research pro-guns here at the institution. and we have three of our research programs represented here today. the growth through innovation project is led inside a brookings by darrell west of our government studies program, bruce katz, of our metropolitan program of our ec
.com/c-span and on twitter. >> next, scientific and government health officials discussed the economic impact of drought. researchers say that climate change will affect the magnitude and severity of future droughts. this is one hour. >> we now have had two very international events, one international and domestic. we are now going to move to a time that moves somewhat more slow, the issue of drought. we had a situation where we begin about one fifth of the situation of drought. by september, three fifths of the united states was in a situation of drought. from crops failed. estimates of crops insurance range from $30 billion up to $40 billion. the prices went up. consumers impacted not just in the united states, but around the world. in 2011 we had a horrific drought in florida. and many of you who are watching were watching the news coverage were watching impact particularly on newborns and children and could not have been more moved profoundly by what he saw. these are the innocent and most deserving victims. at the same time, we had another drought situation. the impact was significantly less for go
supporter of the royal government and was driven out of town. >> on the other side of that, with now is so a different source of media we can to fact check them how often direct lies in order to gain support or to turn people directly to one side or the other? >> well, i mean, you are definitely finding exaggerations, whether it was drastic or not, what i was interested in finding was that a lot of newspaper accounts came with disclaimers pics of the publishers, these printers very much valued reliable sources. and if the source was questionable, they would frequently print that with the article from some sort of disclaimer. >> i remember there was a letter that was published after the battle of lexington and concord that talks about the british soldiers coming to the parsonage in lexington and rampaging through and killing the barnyard animals. that never happened. there's a letter about the battle of bunker hill that says that general howe, as soon as the soldiers reached charlestown can seldom try tried to desert and run away, and he had to them strung up immediately on greasy. that did
's the author of this book, "the spirit of compromise: why governing demands it and campaigning undermines it." president gutmann, are we a politically compromised? >> guest: we were created in compromise. a lot of people think of the revolutionary war, which separated us from our mother country. but if you recall -- i know you weren't there then, but if you recall historically speaking our founding fathers crafted a compromise that created the constitution. they were as polarized as any set of americans have been throughout our country and our history. they were pro-and anti-slavery and the compromise. so yes, we were founded in compromise, that today compromises become more difficult than ever before. >> host: what do you mean when you talk about the uncompromising mindset? >> guest: we live in an era characterized as a permanent campaign, where everyday is election day in campaigning and election may make for uncompromising minds. you stand in your principles, mobilize your base, drawing endless amounts of money. 20 for seven new site will cover his politics is that it's a horserace and th
to bring government to a grinding halt. a couple people and congress can do it from a president can do it who appeared a few people on the supreme court can do it. it's much easier to keep things from happening and make things happen. what drives compromise is the need to do something, they need to move forward and i think roh is going to have a lot of political theater. i come at this as an english major with a background in theater. so i love the theatrical elements of our politics. i think it's fascinating. it's dramatic, comic, tragic. it's a wonderful bit of literature. in the end, the founding generation had a country to create and they were going to give up almost everything but that. we've got problems to solve and i note in the book and believe right now the national debt is probably her generation's problem to solve and it's a big problem and one where there's a whole lot of different values on the line, different interest on the line. i believe we will compromise is we have to because the alternative is just grinding to a halt. but there's always every compromise in the cons
and the rest of the world. we can only build on science. you have to work with government supporters business, parliamentarians, with any stakeholder that understands and is willing to engage in education and managing risk for the future. the first product to the first idea that people that got together in the early parts of the decade serenade instrument for international cooperation. that is key here. they started working on what became the framework for action. i hope at least 10% of you have heard about this. maybe. i'm used to it not being very familiar, but i'm also very used to that people now ascendant when we start describing it. the framework for action was sick to duration of the previous details. there have been neo, strategy, which was strongly science-based, so there's other strategies, but the new strategy was really about globalization. it was really setting a framework for what outcome, both leinster to shoot goals and priorities in the sense of the people who put this together on the site thinks he will be in a safer a safer world. the adoption of the framework for action ha
of government. a set of principles emerged that there is not universal agreement on, but overwhelming consensus and they were the foundation of the recommendations. if you'll permit and another 10 to 12 minutes, i want to lay out what they are from the perspective of the president. the first foundational principle is there is a second amendment. the president and i support the second amendment that comes with the right of law-abiding responsible citizen to own guns, gives a further protection as well as recreation. the second foundational principle, certain people in society should not and legally can be disqualified from being able to own a gun because they are unstable or they are dangerous. they are not the citizens that in fact the vast majority of gun owners comprise. three, we should make common sense judgment about keeping dangerous weapons off our streets. clearly within the purview of the government at the same time recognizing, honoring them being compliant with the second amendment. and for, this isn't just about guns. it is about the coursing of our culture. the coursing of our cult
on the government's role during the country's worst financial crisis since the depression. her book is "bull by the horns." sunday night at eight on c-span's q&a. >> next comic kansas governor sam brownback delivers his third state of the state address. in his remarks before the joint session of the house and senate, he gave his plans for balancing the state budget which faces a projected shortfall of $267 million for the fiscal year beginning july 1. this event in topeka is 25 minutes. >> good evening. mr. speaker, madam president, -- [applause] you jumped my laundry now going to have to repeat. you will have to do that again, i hope. i was just looking at her thinking there's a lot of new faces here. welcome. good to have you in the legislature. it's going to be a great you and they do have before i get started one quick big announcement. next year at this time the capital renovation will be complete. [cheers and applause] finished. that's been about a decade in coming, but it does look beautiful. legislators, justices of the kansas supreme court, lieutenant governor jeff colyer and member
a system in its entirety. but look at ways to control health care costs to get in control of government programs and medicare that we have to go back and do this every couple years. we have to study what works and put more policies that are working in place. we have to do with other entitlement. social security farm is a contentious issue in this country. it's always a tough battle, but the longer we wait to make changes, the more difficult for the people who depend on these programs. we have to go for the tax reform, which is great when you talk about a bradley because the tax cut is a disaster. when you talk about the ability to broaden the base, lower the rates increase revenues, that's a pretty good system. it's pretty desirable to think how to reform the tax code. but when you start talking about specifics for the home mortgage deduction for state and local taxation, because my difficult. so we don't easiest pieces. you don't have to type a single specific policy. tax in 1% is pretty darn easy, even if your the 1%. this guy takes more to fix the problem. now we have the hardest par
rated as one of the worst two-year sessions in the history of the united states government. well, what are we going to do differently? how is it that we only addressed one out of 24 appropriation bills over the last two years? how is it that so many important bills never made it to the floor of the senate, bills such as the replacement for no child left behind, coming on bipartisan vision out of -- out of committee? how is it that so many bills came to this floor to never see a final vote? the disclose act which would have eliminated secrecy in campaign donations. the dream act, which would have honored creating a future for those who know only america as their home. the president's jobs package, which would have helped put america back to work. the closing of loopholes for the biggest, most wealthy oil companies. those funds could be put to use, reducing our deficit or funding critical programs for working americans. on issue after issue after issue, we saw inaction. and what we heard yesterday at the start of this next two years was a call from the president for action. he said in hi
repairs on the national on the association's hand that governs the national mall so that is a virtual cross when we come to it but there's a number of civic minded things we will be able to do if we are lucky enough to have access funds when it said and done. >> whoever can address this how many law enforcement agencies and officers will be involved in the security on the date of the inauguration and also how large an area will be closed off with street closures? >> for stila to apologize for saying it was morning when i was actually afternoon. but to answer your question we cannot go into detail as far as how many law enforcement officers will be present for the inauguration. can you repeat the second question for me? >> [inaudible] >> i can't go into detail unfortunately. >> -- area closed off. >> we have road closures and effectively to talk with you after words to provide you with those. >> [inaudible] >> with all events that happened on the capitol complex, we train constantly to address them. as far as specific threats, i can't answer that right now. but just know myself -- boug
organization to a top down earmark organizations like the rest of the government is, and is largely dysfunctional in many ways. i think that's part of the problem. now you have a loudmouth and a big program and -- this was at to get the real money. that's i think, that's made a mess of it i would have to say. >> it doesn't mean those questions are uninteresting or unimportant, but how we decide what remains a really important question. >> it's not that there's too little money at nih. of course, there is, but the really is enough money at nih just distributed wrongly at the moment. hasn't been corrected i have to say. >> i'm a political science student, my question may be coming out of left field a little bit so bear with me. i just graduate from school after setting four years of politics in america. a lot of political scientists, myself included, have come to the conclusion that americans and the american electorate in general is an uninformed electorate. it's uninformed, not quickly acted and most pertinent to this lecture it's not a scientifically literate electorate. you know,
and the government programs and medicare and we are going to have to go back and do this every couple of years but we have to study what works and put more of the policies that are working in place. we have to deal with our other entitlement. it's a contentious issue in this country. it's always a political tough battle. but the longer we wait to make the changes for the people the difference of the programs there is no question about that and we have to go forward with tax reform which is great when you talk about it broadly we all know the tax code is a disaster and none of us like the tax code. when you talk about the ability to broaden the base, lower the rate and raise revenue, that is a pretty good system. it's pretty desirable to think about how to reform the tax code. but there are a lot of tough things when you talk about the specifics and the fact we need to deal with the mortgage deduction for state and local taxation then capping the discretionary you don't have to talk about a single specific policy. taxing the 1% is easy even if you are the 1% its current take more of that to fix the pr
, the government stepped in to provide flood insurance to ensure that those mortgages and all the investments were covered against this hazard. a noble idea. forcing governments were very responsive to the people that were selling that flood insurance to did like pay a lot of money for it. so we tended to set rates below which supported the risk. now, the problem with this type of investment scheme is it's like a ponzi scheme. it only gets exposed when disasters happen. on a day-to-day basis, year-to-year basis, as long as you're dealing with those expected quote unquote below 100 year event, which i have no idea however we started calling something 100 year events that started happening every month. the other thing, we have two problems. we can't figure out how to deal with risk and we can't figure out how to communicate. your chance to buy a lottery ticket and winning is less than getting hit with a flood -- flood. most people go out and buy lottery tickets. you would be surprised how many people don't buy flood insurance. we don't do a good job if people don't do this. but the challenge with fl
to gather dust on the shelf, of some agency, in government, a set of principles emerged, that there was not universal agreement on, but overall whelming consensus on, and they were the foundation of the recommendations. if you'll permit me about another 10-12 minutes, i want to lay out to you what they are from the perspective of the president and me. the first foundational principle is, there is a second amendment. the president and i support the second amendment. and it comes with the right of law-abiding, responsible citizens to own guns. use it for their protection as well as for recreation. the second foundational principle, certain people in society should not, and legally can be disqualified from, being able to own a gun because they are unstable or they are dangerous. they are not the citizens that in fact the vast majority of gun owners x-ray. -- owners comprise. three, we should make commonsense judgments about keeping dangerous weapons off our streets. clearly within the purview of the government, at the same time recognizing, honoring, and being compliant wit
a hundred libraries in the country. as a nonprofit kind of cooperative effort, with the government and with institutions of governance, which libraries are, throughout the country. so there is a lot of cooperative effort that those take place. in the are a lot of digitals that come to mind. my favorite example is, comes from czarnecki see who wrote reading alito in tehran. she says when she speaks to her students she would say in tehran, you name an american president in the 19th century. and very few could, but one or two might sick wasn't lincoln in the 19th century? and then she says, can you name an american literary figure. all hands raise, and they say mark twain. and so who has the bigger impact in the world? is it a literary figure or is it a political figure? very interesting. we think politics as a society often, when really literature is the power driving figured. >> [inaudible] is advertising. i have always resisted putting advertising in the random house books. whether it be for real pharmaceutical, and yet when you take something like ian fleming novels, james bond, w
we -- both sides of the aisle are looking for ways our government to look better, would like to add flexibility -- not demand it, only permit it -- to also address the other hurricane event which happened, which is in my own state, st. john's parish, and the damage inflicted in st. john didn't make headlines as did sandy, but there were thousands of people who lost their businesses, lost their homes, and we're spending all kinds of money. st. john's parish, one small parish in the midst of the devastation, has spent $12 million on debris removal. 12 million. now, that is predictable. we know it's going to happen and the army corps is moving to figure out a way to mitigate. how to prevent doing this again. i'm told they need a million dollars of federal money to finish the study and begin the authorization process. that's part of what we have committed to in the congress. instead, next time there's a big event, there will be 12 million more in debris removal. it's just crazy. so, again, this is not an earmark for south louisiana. it doesn't instruct the corps to spend one dollar. all
. >> aye. >> mr. become governing. >> aye. >> mr. hastings. >> aye. >> mr. poll. >> aye. >> mr. chairman? >> chairman no. for yea's, nine's. the amendment is not agreed to. the gentleman is wreck wreck d recognized. >> mr. chairman i make the move that -- number 73 would provide $125 million toward the emergency watershed protection program. >> is there further discussion? >> vote now be on the amendment say aye. >> aye. >> no. >> no. >> amendment is not agreed to. >> mr. chair, i question a -- >> we ask the clerk to ask for a roll call. >> miss fix. >> no. >> mr. bishop, no. >> mr. kole? >> mr. wood annual no. >> mr. knew gent. >> no. >> mr. webster? no. miss hoytman, no. >> mr. burgess. >> no. >> miss fodder, aye. >> mr. mcgovern. >> aye. >> mr. hays'ings. >> aye. >> mr. poleis. >> aye, mr. came? injury know. clerk will report, four yea's, nine nays. the amendment is not agreed to. we now move to the motions made be the advice chairman of the committee. toness favor say aye. >> aye. >> those opposed, no. the amendment passes, and we would go ahead and recognize mr. coll will be happeni
government and federal programs. because federal government is funding 40% of the health care in this country. so we have big savings in health care. we have big savings for the federal government. discretionary savings, the speaker proposed 300 billion over 10 years. again, if we put that in context are going to spend $11.6 trillion over the next 10 years. so that would represent a savings of 2.6%. as judd indicated we've already had and the budget control act 900 billion of savings, so there are substantial savings that have already occurred in this area. but we can do another 300 billion. we could save another 2.6%. other mandatory, that's the other major category. again, speaker proposed $200 billion over 10 years. we are going to spend $11 trillion -- i'm sorry, $511 trillion in this category over the next 10 years. so that represents a 10 a savings of 4%. you know, what have we become as a country if we can't make a 4% change? really, that is something we should be able to do. so under the compromise that i proposed, taking the speakers numbers, taking the president's revenue, you can s
and information coming from the city governments for two years against drugs and drug cartels. knowing that there is another stage in the initiative, which is going to do the state government and not the government in this new phase of the initiative they think is necessary that the american people, the federal government in mexico and the united states in which we have a lot of hope in the government of mr. pena nieto and the government of mr. obama, that they can listen other voices on a very delicate subject to security. what are we doing, local governments facing challenges that sometimes go out of our hands and anyway we have to deal with them. there is no doubt that the main concern, for instance, in my city in northeast mexico is a border state with taxes. too often, cities have borders with the rio, texas that we also have my city on the southeast part of the state and it's a strategic location. my city the city of 670,000 people. it's a big city. the metropolitan area sharing the space which has two cities, our neighbors in another city, which is my city. there is no doubt tha
to pay attention, not just local people but the federal government. it would write letters, do all kinds. no one would pay any attention. the sole rights commission decided that first year it would go out and listen to these people and see what they had to say. they had the power to subpoena anyone. eisenhower said, the reason why i want to get it passed by congress instead of issuing an executive order is because by attorney general tells me that is the only way they can subpoena anybody. given what the problems are, some people may not want to come to testify. so the commission most important power of subpoena. they went and looked all over the place to see what the problems or. they made recommendations that were controversial but seemed to make sense. so after they had been there for a while it was clear they need to be reauthorize to needed to be continued to work on these issues. then of course bell rock crisis and those civil-rights movement started to heat up. it was clear that there was a need. in the commission spent the next few years figuring out what to recommend to the gove
of government to regulate guns, but they also put a definite boundary on how far those can go. so an outright ban on handguns like we had in chicago before, like washington, d.c. had, that goes too far. whether the second amendment right goes as far as to extend the right of self-defense that the supreme court found that you have in the home to when you leave the home is another question spirally. entirely. and i think, ultimately, probably the what happens in congress is not going to be greatly affected, is not going to be greatly constrained by what the supreme court is going to allow. i think the court on things like regulation of particular types of guns, waiting periods, background checks and things like that is, will probably be willing to -- we'll probably be willing to allow that sort of thing. >> i wallet you all to know that -- i want you all to know that i've opinion sending mash notes to my wife who's away. [laughter] i know this is a big appointment for you every day, you may not see nightly news tonight, but chuck todd actually had a report on what the president's going to recom
franco. in those days spain had lots of fascists around, not just the government. this was a fascist and even nazis in exile were living in madrid. my next-door neighbor was a romanian nazi. we didn't speak for four years. and also there were lots of people living in madrid then who loved spanish culture as i do. at one point i call this a love letter to spain and it is. i would seek one dimming go corona walking around in my neighborhood, juan domongo pe o perro perrone. when i would see real nazis that was something else. i went to a party. i was invited by the spanish government to go to a party at his place and since he was a guy i worked with in cultural affairs i went to the party and walked in the door in the immediately spotted two people. i couldn't believe it. on one end of the room was a bug gardner who lived in spain and on the other end of the room was otto scored zany --scorzene the guy had their call his favorites folder, he was the leader of the attack on this mountaintop with gliders, partisans in italy who captured mussolini, not sure what to do in 43, and he led t
the way the two economies govern themselves? >> we have dealt with the issues with safeguarding other countries. we did that in the negotiations with colombia. we did that in negotiations with panama. if any two entities can resolve those issues, it is the eu and the united states. essentially, what the eu has been doing, in my judgment, to use regulatory provisions. i don't like the word protect exactly because it's overused, but to essentially safeguard the market from our competition. so we should be able to do that than to structure should be able to meet those tests. that i think is very doable. the french have to be willing to let us enter into their market. and we have had the same problem with russia, and i think that we have basically taken the step to resolve it. do it with russia, we can do it with the eu. >> you talk about the republican party changing. when the democrats were the majority, they had blue dog democrats from south carolina and mississippi and louisiana and north carolina and virginia. they are gone. the democrats have changed. the democrats are far more unif
of the american people and to govern the. "national review" as a very intellectual magazine throughout its existence and i think probably even more so in its early years in the 50s and 60's. a very much needed i think bill buckley managing editor and every other major person there acknowledge to that they very much needed a man just like bill rusher to serve as a lyrical eyes and ears, as a political counselor, as a link between "national review" type people. as rusher tended to put it, the intellectuals and the practical politician. by politicians rusher didn't mean people aspired to public office but the mastermind of the goldwater campaign and the marshal of the goldwater campaign. white too was a politician and rusher was something of a politician. in other words if practitioner of actual politics. russia placed tremendous value on these people, and he was always trying with some success to get the more philosophical conservatives. a classic example of course being buckley himself to appreciate that sort of career and that sort of individual and that sort of effort. a lot of what you'l
raising the debt ceiling gives the government the ability to pay its existing bills. it doesn't create new deficit spending. so not raising the debt ceiling is sort of like a family that's trying to improve its credit rating. families that say, i know how we can save money, we won't pay her credit card bills. it was the sole solution to the debt ceiling in august of 2011 in the u.s. downgraded last time. so all these issues are important and it's very important that congress take necessary action to raise the debt ceiling to avoid a situation where government doesn't pay its bills. >> a number of people have expressed concern about how much of the challenges actually were addressed in a deal, it certainly went part way, but leaves a number of issues still on the table. would you care to raise that as an additional fiscal cliff that is facing us? would you think that it's not as concerning as it was when you raise that term initially? >> as i said the fiscal cliff, if it is allowed to take place, it probably would have traded a recession this year. a good bit of that has been a
government structure. so as i said, -- and in the for the question of -- [inaudible] in trying to share the information we have, and the need to not create a panic. it was a very difficult situation. i think we need to -- [inaudible] the experience and try to come up proper lessons. and that certificate still continuing. as long as we're talking about preparedness perhaps you would like to talk about whether there's environmental preparedness. how does it work? >> exactly get ready for this. >> it's the best preparation for the kinds of environmental disasters. i want to touch upon the education issue and mention briefly that, you know, when the fukushima raid logical disaster hit us, there was a great lack of educate scientists in the community capable of tackling many of the aspect of the environmental impact. we have a shortage of radio geochemistry and geo-- stemming from the fact that we never thought such a thing could happen again. and so emphasis in the field dropped off. at the moment we really need to train a few more folks to handle these kinds of emergencies in the future. t
johnson readily be barry goldwater and richard nixon overwhelming george mcgovern. in each of those elections, one of the candidates failed to capture the spirit of the american voting public. and the winner had the advantage of the weak opponent. franklin roosevelt won his second term, landslide, because of his huge popularity. however, in many more presidential elections, the candidates are in a heated battle to present themselves as the one best capable of serving the country with the winner walking off with the modest majority. it is a customary wisdom that the campaign between the incumbent president and his opponent will be either a referendum on the first term of the president, or a judgment of which candidate will be the better leader. is there really a difference between these two considerations? does not boil down to judging the leadership skill of the incumbent based on his effectiveness during his first term, versus the unknown leadership skills of the challenger? it's easy to point to the national security, or the economic consequences, or consequent impact on the ratin
governments have to operate we have no idea where we get the money over the next 75 years. $88 trillion. that is one point* $05 trillion of bills coming due than we have. if you did not grow the economy at all, a white reporter self in that position? the fed has increased its balance sheet they printed $2 trillion worth of phony many and ultimately the pain will fall on the middle-class and the very core. it is the most -- both parties say they want even if it means we lose our seat reporters cells first instead of the country. it is not hard any citizen if they read back in black there is common-sense ways to save money. just this last week the air force announced this year we spend $64 billion on miti projects 64 billion said gao says half of that will be wasted. it will never be completed. and back in black the city ought to cancel this because it will never work. this is out inefficient government is. finally the air force canceled the spent another 100 million first. they paid the settlement fee to cancel of $8 million. but the person responsible did not get fired and not held acco
of the government, about the size of the deficit, and a lot of back and forth over these three issues. i think i just want, without going into all the different ramifications, i want to say one word about the debt ceiling, which is that not everybody understand what the debt ceiling is about. the debt ceiling, raising the debt ceiling, which congress has to do periodically, gives the government the ability to pay existing bills. it doesn't create new deficits. it doesn't create new spending. so not raising the debt ceiling is sort of like a family, which is trying to improve its credit rating sank i know how we can save money, we won't pay off credit card bills. not the most effective way to improve your credit rating. it was the very slow solution to the debt ceiling in august 2011 i got the u.s. downgraded last time. so it's very, very important that all these issues are important but it's very, very important that congress take necessary action to raise the debt ceiling to avoid a situation where our government doesn't pay its bills. >> a number of people have expressed concern about how much
to have a practice at the commission that the government witnesses would be on the first panel and they object to that inappropriate cases but the reason i'm pointing it out -- i will mention one other thing. the past few times we've invited someone from the department of justice the federal law mandates all federal agencies shall cooperate fully with the commission. they won't send to testify at any time in the past couple of years. so it kind of the allies at least one false myth and that is that the military doesn't take this issue very seriously. so after trying to compliment you, i did want to -- i think to the vice admiral to get up to speed on some of the issues some of the biggest improvements for the kind of career tracking that i think you'll have the lead on in the media and those of us that are -- i was a very brief litigator but prosecutors and other litigators you learn to be a great lawyer by watching the great council, criminal defense working side by side, then having them available to counsel you and for the c-span viewers who may not know why if you could ela
farms are suffering and they rely on these government programs is a critical safety net. we don't want to throw the baby with the bathwater, as my mother used to say. after accounting for all the cost of farming, small and medium farmers met just over $19,000 a year. that is from the usda's statistics. the government programs make up nearly half of that amount. other earnings make up the rest of the household income. the income of a full-time farmers is 19% below the u.s. average. foreign income is not keeping up with the cost using crops, even though the price for corn and soybeans is higher since 2007. the cost of food is a very good example. i am sure you all know these are companies like monsanto and the prices have skyrocketed. corn feed prices rose 33% for fiscal crisis and soybeans are up 24%. also the cost of fuel and fertilizer and other important farming ventures, not to mention the bad weather and drought. small and midsize farms operate at a very slim margin. and if the subsidy program is eliminated without creating a fair market, that farmers can sell into, we are going to
, is a stokely carmichael and huey newton and timothy leary went to war against the united states government and one. [laughter] that's just how important -- impossible it seemed when it all began. >> mr. standiford, of the american colonies, who in your opinion was most radical in terms of methods? >> who was most radical? well, certainly in his passion, in its desperate passion and in his ability to convey it and his ability to rally troops, or supporters, it was a sam adams. i believe that if it had not been for sam adams, would we have -- people always are fond of asking this question. did the sons of liberty really bring us, create a revolution? my answer is yes. history shows it. would there have been a revolution had these men not done what they did as they did at the time they did? maybe. when, we don't know. it would have been the leaders of the battles, we can't be sure. and how -- some say we could have ended up like canada. yes, we would have probably broken away from great britain, but in the way that canada did. there's speculation along those lines. the other interesting thing
from outside the united states coming here including many senior government officials from outside the country. they want to toe what's going on -- they want to know what's going on in the innovation. we're the host and we're also a growing, important industry that is making a difference in the future. when you're talking about raising revenue or cutting spending innovation is the answer. innovation is growth, and we have to make sure our government does not hurt innovation. and sometimes they come awfully close. last year we were talking about pipa and sopa, a law rushing through congress because the copper lobby is so strong which would have allowed, basically anyone in the world to shut down any internet web site. and thank god that was stopped. and it was stopped in part because it started here with members of congress holding a press conference saying this must be stopped. innovation is too important consumer access to the internet is too important, we have to do something about it. and now that sopa and pipa is dead, it's like name your kid adam. no one will do it ever again.
government officials from outside the country. they want to know what's going on with innovation. we are the host and we are phenomenally dynamic growing important industry making a difference in the future. when you're talking about raising revenue or raising taxes or cutting spending innovation is the answer. innovation is growth and we have to make sure our government does not hurt them . we were talking here about hipaa and sopa about the law of rushing through congress because the lobbyists is so strong that would allow anyone in the world to shut down any internet web site by claiming copyright infringement and thank god that was. was stopped because it started here with members of congress holding a press conference saying this must be stopped. innovation is too important in consumer access to the internet is to import and we have to do some ring about. we will never have legislation like that again in congress. it's like name your kid adolf. no one will ever do it again. >> host: gary shapiro do you have an opinion on who you would like to replace julius genachowski at the f
with the perennial conflict between the executive and legislative branches of government. most presidents will extend their exclusive hands of authority to the utmost, congress on the other hand generally seeks to limit, the president's freedom of action. is understood, however, time to time setting such limit may be needed. fourth, the president of servers embrace. of invincibility, of hubris which icons the president to lose touch with political realities. five, the president must exercise influence over and effectively communicate with the nations whose able to communicate persuasively. six, the majority of american people must believe in the president's integrity and sustain a substantial level of pride and the president throughout the eight years in office, despite specific shortcomings he must have strengthened the nation on alan by his actions. the president must lead a legacy for the nation. the list of those failed in their second term includes george washington, james madison, andrew jackson, theodore roosevelt, dwight eisenhower, ronald reagan and bill clinton. the game is a special case i
of the national debate, but i think it's too early to make that decision. >> host: government bullies, second book by senator rand paul, how everyday americans are being harassed, abused and imprisoned by the feds. .. is a memoir and a history book. in the book you talk about your personal journey and you are very candid about your life, and you also cover new insights as a historian to the life and legacy of dr. martin luther king, jr.. what prompted you to write the book this way? >> guest: well, i wanted to write something for the anniversary and this is 50 years of my life and king's legacy and my life coincides with my coming of age, so part of it was to do those two tasks. i felt that my life had been connected to the king legacy, and i felt there was something about my life that needed to be told to understand how king impacted me and how i got involved in this amazing journey of editing team newspapers. >> host: its an excellent reading and you and buy your of the same generation, and why too was coming of age in the 60's. the book i might say was bittersweet to me because i knew dr. king,
in a region that drought is going to develop, hopefully there will be preparedness plans in place, government action, that are going to move us towards putting in place some mitigation measures, measures that will reduce impacts. we can certainly, i mean, there are some states in the united states that is gone to great lengths and have invested a lot of resources in preparedness planning. those models are transferable to other states that are more reactive in nature. we certainly need to continue to work to improve early warning systems, as i mentioned before. the combination of those long lead times, the forecast in early warning systems, which are very comprehensive, the one thing about drought is it's important yes, to measure rainfall and temperature, but it's also important to know what's happening in the entire water supply system. so we need to know the status of reservoirs, status of groundwater, status of stream flow, soil moisture, snow impact. all of those will lead into what will define the security of drought. >> margaret, if i could have you enter that same question, what could
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 80